On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 01:40:57PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Senthil Kumar Selvaraj senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com writes:
[...]
The following program, when compiled with -O0 -g3 (x86_64 target, but
doesn't seem to matter), shows wrong values for p (function parameter)
when
On 06.08.2012 21:13, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 08/06/2012 08:23 AM, Dmitri Shubin wrote:
char *cfa = (char *) _Unwind_GetCFA(ctx);
printf(cfa = %p\nra = %p\n, cfa, *(void **)(cfa - 8));
Use _Unwind_GetIP here, for one.
In fact I'm not interested in IP or RA here, I need some
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Senthil Kumar Selvaraj
senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 01:40:57PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Senthil Kumar Selvaraj senthil_kumar.selva...@atmel.com writes:
[...]
The following program, when compiled with -O0 -g3 (x86_64
On Aug 5, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Perry Smith wrote:
On Aug 5, 2012, at 1:09 PM, David Edelsohn wrote:
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Perry Smith pedz...@gmail.com wrote:
I was planning on exploring when _GLOBAL__FD was called today. I
need to figure out when gcc puts the call to the dtor
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
Hi,
I've had this flagged to look at later for quite long now...
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 07:34:24AM +, Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan
wrote:
Hi,
This is related to pr45605.C test.
Reduced testcase
struct
On 12-08-03 03:55 , Richard Guenther wrote:
I am currently debugging this change. After I fix the remaining PCH
failures, I will send the patch for review.
Please make sure to send a patch doing 4. for review separate of the cxx-branch
merging.
That's the patch I was referring to, yes.
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 03:14:21PM +0200, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Martin Jambor mjam...@suse.cz wrote:
I've had this flagged to look at later for quite long now...
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 07:34:24AM +, Mailaripillai, Kannan Jeganathan
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:43 AM, Perry Smith pedz...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure why this thread died. I've been looking at the code trying to gain
the courage to try and implement the changes I suggested but was
also waiting to hear back from others.
Sorry, I'm not sure what you are waiting to
On Aug 7, 2012, at 10:52 AM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:43 AM, Perry Smith pedz...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure why this thread died. I've been looking at the code trying to gain
the courage to try and implement the changes I suggested but was
also waiting to hear back
This is the beta release of binutils 2.23.51.0.1 for Linux, which is
based on binutils 2012 0806 in CVS on sourceware.org plus various
changes. It is purely for Linux.
All relevant patches in patches have been applied to the source tree.
You can take a look at patches/README to see what have been
On 07/08/2012, Perry Smith wrote:
Is there any documentation about cxa_gaurd and its associated routines? I
think I gather what all it is doing, etc but a general description would
help.
The __cxa_guard stuff is part of the Itanium C++ ABI, see
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Jonathan Wakely jwakely@gmail.com wrote:
The __cxa_guard stuff is part of the Itanium C++ ABI, see
http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/cxxabi-1.83.html#once-ctor (or a
slightly newer version at http://www.swag.uwaterloo.ca/asx/ABI.html)
Neither of those is
I hit a problem about the 2 operands of a addr-plus instruction. My instruction
is special because it is not commutative and requries address be the 2nd
operand and the offset in the 3rd one. But my port generates PLUS_EXPR instead
of POINTER_PLUS_EXPR and finally mistakenly switches the order
Hi,
recently I use the gcc 4.4 to compile fortran programs.and then
I use ld to link these programs .But the ELF I get is a dynamic link
file.However I want to link these files statically for the reason that
I want the VirtAdd of LOAD to be determined in an ELF,so I use the
-Bstatic
I'd just sent mail to r...@gnu.org and he replied.
I know nothing abnout ELF format, and I have not worked on GCC since
1991. Thus, I simply am not in a position to judge the merits of your
suggestion. How about writing to g...@gnu.org, which is the discussion
list for GCC?
My original
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53468
--- Comment #3 from Matthias Klose doko at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
10:29:45 UTC ---
Comment on attachment 27825
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27825
multiarch-2012-07-08
2012-06-25 Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191
Bug #: 54191
Summary: [C++11] SFINAE does not handle conversion to
inaccessible base
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191
--- Comment #1 from Ai Azuma ai.azuma at gmail dot com 2012-08-07 11:19:03
UTC ---
Created attachment 27955
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27955
Some test cases for SFINAE on conversion to inaccessible base
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191
--- Comment #2 from Ai Azuma ai.azuma at gmail dot com 2012-08-07 11:21:36
UTC ---
Created attachment 27956
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27956
Output of -v option
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jamborm at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54182
wbrana wbrana at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|build |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54192
Bug #: 54192
Summary: -fno-trapping-math by default?
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54192
--- Comment #1 from Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
12:50:16 UTC ---
The current reasoning is that the C standard allows the implementation to
say that only round-to-nearest is supported but not that the trapping parts
of
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54192
--- Comment #2 from Marc Glisse glisse at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 13:13:46
UTC ---
Don't you need to tell the compiler (with the FENV_ACCESS pragma) that you are
going to look at flags, just like you tell it that you are going to use
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54193
Bug #: 54193
Summary: dump_gimple_assign raw can't handle 4 operands
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54191
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com 2012-08-07
14:36:19 UTC ---
For the cases where we are producing inaccessible base diagnostics in SFINAE
context, the issue is that lookup_base is called by functions getting a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54193
Richard Guenther rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194
Bug #: 54194
Summary: GCC 4.8 gives misleading suggestion about arithmetic
in operand of '|'
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
Status:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194
Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||diagnostic
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
Bug #: 54195
Summary: [4.8 Regression][OOP] IMPORT fails with GENERIC TBP:
is already present in the interface
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.8.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
--- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
16:47:10 UTC ---
It works with the snapshot GCC 4.8.0 20120624 and fails with the one from
20120701.
The changelog lists only one entry in that period, namely:
Author: janus
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 18:12:07 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
The changelog lists only one entry in that period, namely:
Author: janus
Date: Wed Jun 27 17:38:00 2012
New Revision: 189022
Yeah, I knew it
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53135
--- Comment #8 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
18:47:16 UTC ---
For those running into the problem, analternative to patching GCC isto reduce
the maximum expression depth for var-traking with --param
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54196
Bug #: 54196
Summary: gcc doesn't find incompatible exception specification
for operator
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: 4.7.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54197
Bug #: 54197
Summary: [4.7/4.8 regression] Lifetime of reference not
properly extended
Classification: Unclassified
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54196
--- Comment #1 from mib.bugzilla at gmail dot com 2012-08-07 18:57:28 UTC ---
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/site/spt/rdrive/ref/gcc/4.7.0/efi2/bin/../libexec/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.7.0/lto-wrapper
Target:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54194
--- Comment #2 from Manuel López-Ibáñez manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
19:35:45 UTC ---
Use warning_at and pass down the correct location of the operator if possible,
otherwise input_location?
Of course, it would be nice to have ranges but I
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54197
H.J. Lu hjl.tools at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #28 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
19:58:00 UTC ---
To illustrate the rewrite_into_closed_loop_ssa problem, consider this test
case:
extern void use1 (int);
extern void use2 (int);
extern int confuse_loop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54177
--- Comment #3 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
20:08:27 UTC ---
Having reviewed teh other uses of var_lowpart, I hereby approve the patch if it
passes regstrap. Thanks!
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 20:23:26 UTC ---
My first attempt to fix it would be something like this:
Index: gcc/fortran/resolve.c
===
---
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54114
--- Comment #4 from Alexandre Oliva aoliva at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
20:28:05 UTC ---
It seems quite clear to me that the new cost arises due to
clobber_overlapping_mems, a relatively expensive operation that fixes a debug
info correctness
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53579
Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54196
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Wakely redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
20:55:36 UTC ---
N.B. there are various overloads of operator new that are implicitly declared
in every translation unit, including (in C++03)
void* operator new(std::size_t)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54177
--- Comment #4 from Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com 2012-08-07 21:07:53
UTC ---
Author: uros
Date: Tue Aug 7 20:57:56 2012
New Revision: 190212
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190212
Log:
* var-tracking.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54177
Uros Bizjak ubizjak at gmail dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 21:21:23 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
However: Witout the patch, the code guarded by the IF statement above is
called
twice (which leads to the error). But with the patch, it is not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54195
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07 22:05:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Will start a full regtest now ...
Completed successfully.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #29 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
22:28:11 UTC ---
Created attachment 27957
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=27957
Do not traverse sibling loops
The idea here is to note that for a nested
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53661
Sriraman Tallam tmsriram at google dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |c++
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54146
--- Comment #30 from Steven Bosscher steven at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
22:36:30 UTC ---
Created attachment 27957 [details]
With the attachment, time spent in rewrite_into_loop_closed_ssa is almost 0
(and that includes the time in the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=54005
--- Comment #1 from Benjamin Kosnik bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org 2012-08-07
23:04:05 UTC ---
Author: bkoz
Date: Tue Aug 7 23:03:55 2012
New Revision: 190216
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=190216
Log:
2012-08-07 Benjamin Kosnik
Hello,
In the test case for PR54146, build_insn_chain spends almost all its
time in this loop:
FOR_EACH_BB_REVERSE (bb)
{
bitmap_iterator bi;
rtx insn;
CLEAR_REG_SET (live_relevant_regs);
-- memset (live_subregs_used, 0, max_regno * sizeof (int));
The test case has
Hello,
In the test case for PR54146, compute_global_livein allocates/frees a
worklist for 400,000 basic blocks on each invocation. And it's called
a lot, for rewrite_into_loop_closed_ssa. But the maximum number of
basic blocks ever on the work list was only ~6500. So the work list
can be much
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou ji...@gmx.net wrote:
What else is missing to make this patch appropriate for libiberty? Should I
change the prolog in strnlen.c, since I only copied it intact from gnulib?
We generally try to avoid straight GPL source code without runtime
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@google.com wrote:
Convert double_int from a struct with function into a class with
operators and methods.
This patch adds the methods and operators. In general functions of
the form double_int_whatever become member functions whatever or,
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
In the test case for PR54146, compute_global_livein allocates/frees a
worklist for 400,000 basic blocks on each invocation. And it's called
a lot, for rewrite_into_loop_closed_ssa. But the maximum number of
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
In the test case for PR54146, compute_global_livein allocates/frees a
worklist for 400,000 basic blocks on each invocation.
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
In the test case for PR54146,
On Mon, 6 Aug 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Dimitrios Apostolou ji...@gmx.net wrote:
What else is missing to make this patch appropriate for libiberty? Should I
change the prolog in strnlen.c, since I only copied it intact from gnulib?
We generally try to
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Another optimization would be to do
@@ -440,13 +442,13 @@ compute_global_livein (bitmap livein ATT
! bitmap_bit_p (def_blocks, pred_index)
bitmap_set_bit (livein, pred_index))
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
Another optimization would be to do
@@ -440,13 +442,13 @@ compute_global_livein (bitmap livein ATT
! bitmap_bit_p
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
So I wonder why simply looping over all SSA defs in a loop body and checking
whether a use is outside of it is not enough to compute this information ...
(yes, we might end up creating too many loop closed PHIs,
ping?
re-attaching the updated patch with the fixed comment in genmultilib.
Matthias
On 08.07.2012 20:48, Matthias Klose wrote:
Please find attached v2 of the patch updated for trunk 20120706, x86 only,
tested on
x86-linux-gnu, KFreeBSD and the Hurd.
I left in the comment about the
It's the only LHS setter that does not so and that results in the
asymmetry of create_phi_node needing a SSA_NAME_DEF_STMT adjustment
if you fed it an SSA name result as opposed to a VAR_DECL result
in which case it will be already adjusted.
Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu,
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Richard Guenther
richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
So I wonder why simply looping over all SSA defs in a loop body and checking
whether a use is outside of it is not enough to compute
This makes sure clobbers of SSA names are never retained in the IL.
First by verifying that in the gimple verifier, second by removing
them when we go into SSA form. Third by catching those we have to
get rid of when un-nesting - this avoids stuff like
finally
{
D.1234 = CLOBBER;
On 07/08/12 05:43, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
This patch to libgo, from Shenghou Ma, adds support for NumCPU on
additional platforms: Solaris, Irix, *BSD, Darwin. Bootstrapped and ran
Go testsuite on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Committed to mainline.
Ian
Wouldn't it be more useful on Linux
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 12:07 AM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Ping...
Richard, could you shed some lights on this?
Thanks,
Dehao
On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Dehao Chen de...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
This patch fixes the source location for automatically generated calls
to
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Simon Baldwin sim...@google.com wrote:
Omit TARGET_LIB_PATH from RPATH_ENVVAR in HOST_EXPORTS on bootstrap builds.
Discussion and rationale at: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-06/msg00314.html
For google/main. Tested for bootstrap and regression.
2012-08-02
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson h...@bitrange.com wrote:
Just don't forget that libiberty isn't a target library anymore.
To wit, the (GCC) run-time exception is moot for that code, AFAIK.
Maybe enough reason to abandon that rule so its code can be
truly and freely shared
This adds copy_ssa_name similar to duplicate_ssa_name but not copying
any annotations (thus, just make a new SSA name that looks similar
to a template). This avoids a bunch of SSA_NAME_VAR uses which will
no longer work to create SSA names off.
The 2nd part is stuff I came along when working on
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:31 AM, Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com wrote:
ping?
On 08.07.2012 20:48, Matthias Klose wrote:
Please find attached v2 of the patch updated for trunk 20120706, x86 only,
tested on
x86-linux-gnu, KFreeBSD and the Hurd.
+[case ${withval} in
+yes|no|auto-detect)
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Ulrich Weigand uweig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
ChangeLog:
* target.def (vector_alignment): New target hook.
* doc/tm.texi.in (TARGET_VECTOR_ALIGNMENT): Document new hook.
* doc/tm.texi: Regenerate.
*
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Ulrich Weigand uweig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Ulrich Weigand uweig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
ChangeLog:
* target.def (vector_alignment): New target hook.
* doc/tm.texi.in
On Tue, 7 Aug 2012, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:30 AM, Hans-Peter Nilsson h...@bitrange.com wrote:
Just don't forget that libiberty isn't a target library anymore.
To wit, the (GCC) run-time exception is moot for that code, AFAIK.
Maybe enough reason to abandon that
On 07/08/12 16:04, Richard Guenther wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Ulrich Weigand uweig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
Richard Guenther wrote:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Ulrich Weigand uweig...@de.ibm.com wrote:
ChangeLog:
* target.def (vector_alignment): New target hook.
(Note that while the patch contains changes to common code, those
should be no-ops for all targets that do not implement the new hook.)
I'll defer the decision to the target maintainers.
I'd rather have this consistent across all maintained release branches
today than to leave this for an
On 08/06/2012 05:45 PM, Sandra Loosemore wrote:
OK to commit the patch as originally posted?
Yes.
I mis-read skimming the part of that function about relocations.
r~
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Richard Earnshaw rearn...@arm.com wrote:
Wouldn't it be more useful on Linux to check the task's affinity
settings? Then when a task is locked to a limited set of cores it won't
overload those cores with threads.
Good question. I'm not sure. This patch does
Richard Henderson wrote:
[ This ought to be exactly the patch you bootstrapped. It does
not include the SEQ follow-up. ]
Split out s390_two_part_insv from s390_expand_cs_hqi to try
harder to use bit insertion instructions in the CAS loop.
Reorg s390_expand_insv to aid that. Try RISBG
Richard Henderson wrote:
On 08/06/2012 11:34 AM, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
There is one particular inefficiency I have noticed. This code:
if (!__atomic_compare_exchange_n (v, expected, max, 0 , 0, 0))
abort ();
from atomic-compare-exchange-3.c gets compiled into:
l
On 08/07/2012 02:22 AM, Steven Bosscher wrote:
Hello,
In the test case for PR54146, build_insn_chain spends almost all its
time in this loop:
FOR_EACH_BB_REVERSE (bb)
{
bitmap_iterator bi;
rtx insn;
CLEAR_REG_SET (live_relevant_regs);
-- memset
On Aug 6, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
Convert double_int from a struct with function into a class with
operators and methods.
We have a wide_int class that replaces this class. :-( It would have been
better to just convert it. Do you guys have a timeframe for the cxx-conversion
On 12-08-07 13:22 , Mike Stump wrote:
On Aug 6, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
Convert double_int from a struct with function into a class with
operators and methods.
We have a wide_int class that replaces this class. :-( It would
have been better to just convert it. Do you guys
Hi,
this is an update on C++/54191, where in a number of cases, having to do
with inaccessible bases, we don't handle correctly access control under
SFINAE.
The attached draft patch p fixes a number of tests (and passes
regression testing), where we are currently emitting inaccessible base
On 8/7/12, Richard Guenther richard.guent...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Lawrence Crowl cr...@google.com wrote:
Convert double_int from a struct with function into a class with
operators and methods.
This patch adds the methods and operators. In general functions of
On 8/7/12, Mike Stump mikest...@comcast.net wrote:
On Aug 6, 2012, at 5:35 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
Convert double_int from a struct with function into a class with
operators and methods.
We have a wide_int class that replaces this class. :-(
Really? Where? I don't see neither definition
Hello,
This patch fixes PR54150. The patch was approved by Richi in Bugzilla,
but I won't commit this for a few days so that others can speak up if
they don't agree.
Ciao!
Steven
PR54150.diff
Description: Binary data
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Steven Bosscher stevenb@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
This patch fixes PR54150. The patch was approved by Richi in Bugzilla,
but I won't commit this for a few days so that others can speak up if
they don't agree.
Ciao!
Steven
OK. Thanks for the cleanup!
--
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Richard Sandiford
rdsandif...@googlemail.com wrote:
For the record, I can't approve this, but...
H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com writes:
i386,md has
(define_expand extzv
[(set (match_operand:SI 0 register_operand)
(zero_extract:SI (match_operand 1
On Aug 7, 2012, at 11:38 AM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
Hm. There seems to be significant opinion that there should not be any
implicit conversions. I am okay with operations as above, but would like
to hear the opinions of others.
If there is an agreed upon and expected semantic, having them are
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:00 PM, H.J. Lu hjl.to...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 8:50 PM, Jason Merrill ja...@redhat.com wrote:
12.2 states that a temporary bound to a reference lives as long as the
reference itself. We have done that for reference variables, but not in
other
Looks good to me for google-4_7 branches.
-Rong
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Cary Coutant ccout...@google.com wrote:
This patch is for the google/gcc-4_7 branch. It backports the following
patch from trunk at r190190:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2012-08/msg00321.html
GCC
Hello Everyone,
This patch is for the Cilk Plus branch affecting mainly the C++
compiler. This patch will store the initial value of a loop correctly and
remove the unnecessary static chain usage for some cases of Cilk_for.
Thanks,
Balaji V. Iyer.
Index: parser.c
1 - 100 of 116 matches
Mail list logo
